John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
I first met Richard Heyser in 1968 at an AES convention in Hollywood. He, Paul Klipsch, and I would get together for some Kentucky Whiskey that Paul brought. I stayed close friends with Richard Heyser, for almost 20 years, and I would often call him at home when I had an important, if not vexing question. Once it was 'What is true delay?' He was one of the most brilliant people I have ever associated myself with.
He would often 'stun' me with statements like. Negative feedback is a serious problem in audio design. 'That if 2 or more people heard an audio difference, then it is real.' etc
And he showed Bascom King and me his first TDS measurement system, more than 40 years ago.
Richard and I worked in the 70's to make the AES as good a society as possible, but I became disillusioned with the AES along with Walt Jung, when we were at upper level committee meetings and realized it was more like a boys club, rather than a professional organization.
It was a real loss to lose Richard Heyser, and later, Michael Gerzon, two people I made peace between, and two of the smartest people I ever had the privilege of knowing.

You've said similar things about Jack Bybee.

se
 
Member
Joined 2004
Paid Member
Maybe in the 20th century. (below) is a typical 21'st century setup - 7 !
Hubs with 2 or 4 ports apiece. I'm not even using them all.

I can plug everything USB I own into just one "enhanced" with no latency !
The "enhanced" - usb2.0 hubs with a older PC - before PCI-E ...
might just do 35-200mb/s. PCI-E bus USB can do the full 480mb/s !

12mb/s is the old PCI 1.0 (1995 PC's). Mice still default to this , even on
a super fast 2.0 interface.

I've tried every sample rate my PC toslink (or usb) will output .
An onboard 2013 PC audio codec will negotiate 44.1 -192Khz using
only <10% of the usb bandwidth ,on a cheap "pocket DAC".

OS

Interesting-
The USB-PCI or USB PCIe controller passes back to the host the data. The bandwidth of the controller can be very high (Gbps) but the USB side is specific. A USB 2 controller will share the 480 Mbps among its connections. 2 drives on one controller will need to share the 480 Mbps. Same for audio. USB3 can do 5 Gbps and even 10 Gbps over PCIe. Its not the host bus that is an issue.

My late model Intel I7/X77 motherboard only has 3 USB controllers. 2 USB 1/2 and 1 USB3 controller. It seems they also can have virtual controllers.

I have never seen a motherboard with 7 internal USB controllers. They would need to be external since the chipset would not have that many. it must have a real forest of USB connectors on the back and front of the box.

Windows does not have native support for UAC 2, needed to handle 176 and 192 sample rates. There are several aftermarket drivers that can provide UAC 2 for Windows. Some 192 USB cards use a different way to pass audio, bulk transfer, which can easily cause problems when some higher priority traffic bumps the audio. UAC2 audio prioritizes the audio as isochronous with reserved bandwidth for the audio stream. However the CPU could still miss an interrupt and drop audio if its loaded and the priorities aren't managed well. There are some tools for testing this. Its an issue in DAW's and usually requires major efforts to remove unnecessary background stuff.

If you really want to know more on the audio interfaces there are computer audio sites with lots of info and about as much SNR on good data as here.
 
My late model Intel I7/X77 motherboard only has 3 USB controllers. 2 USB 1/2 and 1 USB3 controller. It seems they also can have virtual controllers.

I have never seen a motherboard with 7 internal USB controllers. They would need to be external since the chipset would not have that many. it must have a real forest of USB connectors on the back and front of the box.

4 are native to the MB chipset , the other 3 are a 3rd party chip on the PCI-E
bus. (but that chip is on the MB , too) ... not a card .
Those first 4 are terminated on the MB itself (8 ports) ,the USB 3 ones are headers. I have one of those headers connected to a front usb 2 port ..
it works as usb 2 without the drivers.
Those "enhanced " ones are the usb 3's , I installed the drivers ... device manager changed. I suppose AMD is more "USB centric' than intel . My older
2 core duo intels had just basic 2 hub USB on the southbridge :apathic:.

If I connected all my headers ... yes - I would have a "forest" (of wires , too).

OS
 
Last edited:
Jack Bybee is a different case: I have been 'surprised' by what he can demonstrate in changing audio quality. I don't consider him as brilliant as Richard Heyser or Michael Gerzon, but apparently he was quite a physicist decades before I met him. I did come to realize that I knew relatively little about the true state of atoms and electrons, as well as the flow of electricity. I tried fairly hard to catch up and at least have a definitive answer to how electricity flows in a wire (for example) but it still remains a relative mystery to me, even with a bookshelf of books on the subject. Jack is still a good friend of mine, and has a very good audio system, one of the best I have ever heard, but not the only audio system that is that good. I know two others in the Berkeley area who have Bybee components in their systems and sound even better.
 
Maybe in the 20th century. (below) is a typical 21'st century setup - 7 !
Hubs with 2 or 4 ports apiece. I'm not even using them all.

I can plug everything USB I own into just one "enhanced" with no latency !
The "enhanced" - usb2.0 hubs with a older PC - before PCI-E ...
might just do 35-200mb/s. PCI-E bus USB can do the full 480mb/s !

12mb/s is the old PCI 1.0 (1995 PC's). Mice still default to this , even on
a super fast 2.0 interface.

I've tried every sample rate my PC toslink (or usb) will output .
An onboard 2013 PC audio codec will negotiate 44.1 -192Khz using
only <10% of the usb bandwidth ,on a cheap "pocket DAC".

OS

We are referring to the Adum4160 isolator though that can only do 12Mbps so the controllers in the PC become a moot point.
 
Last edited:
AX tech editor
Joined 2002
Paid Member
Internal Jitter 300ps RMS, no good for audio work?:D

The real question is, what are you going to measure? I would think of measuring the jitter in say a 1kHz tone, and comparing that to the output of the DA process.

The measurements I have done were with a controlled amount of jitter inserted in the stream and checking the impact on audio.

Can this unit also insert controlled jitter amounts?

BTW In my tests I did not see any issue with the analog output until I increased jitter to 50nS pk-pk or so...

Jan
 
Does this seem like a reasonable quality DAC for the price?

Free Shipping PCM1794+WM8805 DAC decode board Decoder (not including USB card)-in Amplifier from Consumer Electronics on Aliexpress.com | Alibaba Group

And if not, can someone suggest a cheap 24-bit 192KHz DAC that is?

To many PTH decouplers for my taste:) but at the price I may even get one myself for or I may look at this found on same page:
YJ daul AC12V 0 12V NE5534 + AK4399 + SA9227 DAC USB decoder board suppoert PCM model-in Amplifier from Consumer Electronics on Aliexpress.com | Alibaba Group

Incredible prices, great for doing a little stand alone system:)
 
Member
Joined 2002
Paid Member
If you really want to know more on the audio interfaces there are computer audio sites with lots of info and about as much SNR on good data as here.

Any recommendation?


We are referring to the Adum4160 isolator though that can only do 12Mbps so the controllers in the PC become a moot point.

We started with AduM4160 and it’s limitations but IMHO it’s good to know what happens within the PC, especially so when many of USB BW limit exceedance cases (dependent on devices connected, mode of communication and which one was connected first) can lead to intermittent data transfer problems, maybe unnoticed at the time they occur but certainly mind puzzling.
(besides, not everyone has an updated PC motherboardand.)

I always appreciate the contribution of participants who know what they are talking about
:)

George
 
To many PTH decouplers for my taste:) but at the price I may even get one myself for or I may look at this found on same page:
YJ daul AC12V 0 12V NE5534 + AK4399 + SA9227 DAC USB decoder board suppoert PCM model-in Amplifier from Consumer Electronics on Aliexpress.com | Alibaba Group

Incredible prices, great for doing a little stand alone system:)

Thanks, I can't find a datasheet on the SA9227 though. It seems it may be like the PCM510x, compromised THD+N and dynamic range in order to achieve 384KHz samplerate, which is not my target (though I would like to experiment with it).
 
For just over £30 UK I wont grumble, my lad wants a better set up in his bedroom so space is at a premium and he starts college in a few weeks so it can be a nice project for him (plus he's buying some of the parts out of his upcoming 16th birthday money) BONUS for me. I am donating some speakers I found in a box from my FR days (Fostex 166 and Eminence 12")and the cabinets. We did have some little amps both chip amp based and some with built in heatsinks that I had rescued from some test gear, but they seem to have disappeared, so cheap amps and crossover next.:)
 
IF it does, it will have a PLL which takes care of that. This is electronic design 101.

Jan


I'll use this quote which explains it very well:


PLL’s can reduce input jitter but they can’t suppress it completely.

Phase Locked Loop (PLL) circuits are used to filter clock signals. A PLL is an electronic equivalent to a flywheel. Prior to the CD, cheap record players were abundant. These often had lightweight stamped metal platters. In contrast, high-end turntables have massive platters to help them spin at a constant rate. A PLL stores and releases electrical energy in much the same way as a flywheel stores and releases mechanical energy. Some turntables have heavy flywheels, others do not. Likewise, some PLLs have a slow enough response, and enough inertia to adequately remove jitter, others do not. We can look at a turntable and see the size of the flywheel, but we can’t look at a digital converter and see the size of the “electronic flywheel” contained in the PLL circuit. Jitter attenuation specifications are essential for assessing the effectiveness of the PLL.
For more details, see:
The Well-Tempered Computer
 
More on jitter, from what I have gleamed from posted notes and internet searches the audibility from listen tests does seem to be around 10ns (in some very rare cases less than that).
The Well-Tempered Computer
Even more on jitter...
"Low Rate Uncorrelated or Noise-Like Jitter" - to quote Paul Miller.

So there you are, we even have a "name" for it, albeit a cumbersome one.

This kind of jitter is very hard to measure. But it is also the kind of jitter that makes digital sound DIGITAL. Peculiarly, the other forms of jitter are far more likely to make sonic differences that are perceived as analogue differences. Hence we can hear the differences in digital cables etc., as Harley points out, things like digital cables takes on analogue behaviour.

But rarely are these difference DESTRUCTIVE in nature, more like "voicing" in speakers and we pick our preferences.

But we are targeting something beyond "voicing" - something OBVIOUS to the ear as WRONG, something we have collectively coined... DIGITITUS !!!

UNL Jitter, Uncorrelated Noise-Like Jitter.
The Terra Firma Concept: Jitter is Analogue
Allan Variance.gif
The contention is that very low rate clock centre frequency variance is relatively very high in amplitude (1/f noise characteristic) wrt audio band jitter, and is subjectively much more destructive.
This is why I have in the past mentioned jitter spectrum.
White noise clock instability causes a, well, white noise noise cloud over the reproduced audio.
VLF clock instability causes a 'vibrato' effect, and this is distinctly audible causing general lack of image clarity and stability, in particular centre placement and depth imaging, and sense of wrong pitch.

Allan Variance
AllanVariance/
Science Of Timekeeping

Dan.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.